…this televised undressing of one of those Phelps harridans really should unsettle me. And yet, I found it rather amusing.
Strange, that.
Am I in denial? Has the universe spun off its perfectly bi-polar axis? Because the fact that this exchange happened on FOXNews, a veritable kennel for anti-progressive haters, makes it that much more surreal, I admit. Which, perhaps I’d better go ruthlessly beat one of the African-American bimbo-dykes I keep chained in the crawl space with a very stale baguette. You know, to re-establish my bona fides and convince myself that I haven’t strayed from my true conservative nature.
I WILL NOT BE DOMESTICATED, PROGRESSIVES!
I dunno – I just cannot imagine some crypto-Helen Thomas taking one of these scum to task. Say, has anyone of the brave dissenters on Air America ever done such?
Hmmm.
Huh? Watch it mister – or as a duly appointed, slavering killbot, I will drum you out of the “movement” myself. Baguette? Better make that a stale bag of Texas Toast.
By the way, I realize Fred is a registered Dem, but he’s not a real Dem. His being a hater and all. So the Dems have made him an honorary Rethug. Which means he must be conservative. Which means he’s just like me. QED.
It is good thing they were not in the studio together because Julie looked like she was about hit the Phelpsette over the head with something more painful than a baguette.
I wonder what Julie’s editor was thinking. I mean, you know he or she was considering cutting to commercial or back to the newsdesk. Unless Julie planned it. And told the editor in advance.
In which case, SHE. IS. MY. GOD. Or Goddess. Whatever.
One of the finest arguments in favor of abortion on demand ever filmed.
SB: who
are you?
I saw it yesterday, and couldn’t help but think that inbreeding really is a bad idea.
In many countries newspapers or even TV channels openly align themselves with a political party. That is exactly what Fox News is, a Republican news channel. That is why Cheney’s hotel instructions are to preset all televisions to Fox News. It’s the news channel that makes him comfortable.
To be sure, sometimes the talking heads on Fox sound conservative rather than Republican. Sometimes it even sounds middle of the road. But all of that is within the range of Republican self-criticism.
Phelps, of course, has strayed far from any useful Republican or conservative script. If he’s a registered Democrat, so much the better as far as Fox is concerned.
Personally I don’t mind so much if the Republicans have their own propaganda channel. It’s a free country and the viewers can watch what they want. It’s their responsibility, really. Personally I think that almost all of the TV news is crud and it’s one reason that I don’t own a TV. (Just like the Vice President, I keep tabs on it when I’m in a hotel.)
Please, I beg of you, don’t use the word undressing in relation to that Phelps-Roper woman ever again.
I’m off to find my Clorox.
As a Rethuglian, once I tried to watch CNN, and the chip in my head went off.
MAN that hurt. Never again.
Major John sez:
Yes. On its inagural day, Randi Rhodes shouted down Ralph Nader for the egregiously excercising his individual rights.
Nader wisely hung up on her.
Kuperberg says:
I can’t disagree wtih you that TV news is mostly crap, but by not owning a TV you’re denying yourself all sorts of educational viewing.
For example: Mythbusters is cool; they blow shit up.
How progressive. Love it or leave it.
feh, like Greg can’t find that in a book. Generally, I find that people trot out the “I don’t have a TV” line to show how much better they are than the rest of us schmucks.
Having a TV doesn’t make people schmucks, believing it does.
Exactly…as if the internet doesn’t rot one’s brain just as quickly.
Me, I own a TV. It is too small, but one day I shall purchase a bigger one. And I shall upgrade my meager X-Box to an X-Box 360 (and man that new Wii sounds cool). For now, I am content to enjor the simple pleasures of Gun
Greg, if you are going to pontificate like you actually know something, you should, you know, actually know something:
Phelps was an Al Gore delegate at the 1998 Democratic convention and is a longime democrat.
Could you please try a little harder? I’m tired following along behind you cleaning up your messes.
We have a New Troll (same as the Old Troll) the inestimably indefatigable Perfesser CooperBorg:
…who teaches the proud art of proof by assertion on this and many other fine threads coming soon to a other-hating weblog near you!
Speak it, Perfesser! (And watch actuse tremble. Blogfight!)
tw: Back to the future, Neothugs, where up is down!
Maggie:
Not the how-to, the sheer voyeuristic fun of watching them try to paint a room using paint-filled balloons and gunpowder.
Heheheh. Right on cue:
Strayed? What did Fred Phelps ever have to do with the GOP? Way to go, Greg. Hope you enjoyed making a fool of yourself.
What’s it like being a fish in a barrel?
Speaking of actard, this just popped into my head, not sure where from:
Hmmm. Oh well.
Anyway actuse, I can’t blame you leaving sorry, bankrupt Brazil behind. Can’t blame you getting a little hot about being invited to head on back to where progressives are making such inroads restablishing the place as the economic wonder of the southern hemisphere.
You go, girl.
tw: Soon?
Generally, I find that people trot out the “I don’t have a TV†line to show how much better they are than the rest of us schmucks.
Of course Maggie, you’re on to me. Proving my superiority is my main goal in life; I don’t take any actions to actually have a nice day. For example, when I hang up on telemarketers, it’s not because they suck, it’s to float above the salt of the earth who have all day for those calls.
But now and then I get tired of putting on airs, since after all it is totally incompatible with genuine happiness. Sometimes at night I barf up the sushi that I had that day, because I really can’t stand the stuff — I just eat it to make the usual point. When that happens I spend the next hour with Bud Lite and Garfield comics. In a locked bathroom, of course.
A UC Davis professor should read his UCLA colleagues’ assessment of FOXNews and other news providers here.
Although I will say that I’m not sure that I should even bother. After all, Dr Kuperberg seems quite sure of what FOXNews is and does, and he manages his critique after admitting he doesn’t own a TV set.
I know, I know. Faulty cause and effect. Perhaps it was FOXNews that convinced him to be rid of the accursed speaking box in the first place.
Still, it’s important not to confuse news analysis shows with news. And really, some of those whom people critical of FOX like to cite as conservative are hardly that.
I mean, Bill O’Reilly? A populist blowhard. Sean Hannity? Perhaps, but more a GOP cheerleader than anything else. Brit Hume is a conservative. But his newscast is quite balanced. At least, if you can believe the UCLA study.
Oh, and people who think not having a TV somehow makes them better than those who do usually aren’t as smart as they think they are.
Me, I have five TVs. Three High-Def widescreens of 26, 37, and 47 inches, and a couple of smaller sets. Oh, and my PC is set up as a streaming video server/PVR.
The funny thing is that I don’t really watch all that much TV, either, but when I want to it’s going to be accessible, damn it.
“Personally I don’t mind so much if the Republicans have their own propaganda channel. It’s a free country and the viewers can watch what they want.”
Yes Greg, it is a free country. And of course the dems have cnn,msnbc,telemundo,cbs,nbc,abc,and most every major city affiliate….
oh, i’ve watched the saturday marathons, it’s just, you know, for some, sooooooo juvenile and not worth their time.
I didn’t say you don’t enjoy it, you’ve already shown you’re a glutton for punishment here in previous threads.
Generally, I find that people trot out the “I don’t have a TV†line to show how much better they are than the rest of us schmucks.
How many people who don’t have a tv, keep that information to them-self? What’s the point, unless you can bring it up in conversations. Which they invariably do.
Phelps was an Al Gore delegate at the 1998 Democratic convention and is a longime democrat.
Okay, fine, I stand corrected. It’s not even that Phelps has strayed from any Republican script; in fact, he’s a Democrat. Phelps is yet another demonstration that the Democratic Party is the party of self-loathing. Way to go Fox!
Fox is fair and balanced you know. And the GOP is the fair and balanced party. Birds of a feather.
And I’m missing it because I don’t own a TV. If I weren’t so bent on putting on airs, I would drink in the mainstream media every night. Then I’d condemn it as biased.
I watched the video. My first thought was “eight kids? My second thought was “not with your johnson”. Eeeewwww. If nasty was a nickle, that lady’d be rich.
Phred Phelps was also invited to both of Clinton’s inaugural celebrations according to that notorious right wing rag, Mother Jones.
From the March/April 1999 issue:
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1999/03/lauerman.html
Part of the Dems “southern strategy,” stoo?
Yet again. Your success rate is approaching that of Kos.
Actually, if you weren’t so bent on putting on airs, you might actually make a cogent point.
The thing is, I think I’m safe in saying most people who frequent political blogs, at least on this side of the street, know exactly who Fred Phelps is and what his history is.
What’s your excuse?
I’m not that good at reading intentions, Jeff. I was trying to subtly demonstrate that the good doctor from UC Davis—in addition to not being one for TV—is apparently not much of a reader, either.
Why thanks, perfesser. I take back all that stuff I said about you.
tw: Finally realizing the blowback fact of 50 long years of left-leaning antennas…
Jeff Goldstein: A UC Davis professor should read his UCLA colleagues’ assessment of FOXNews and other news providers here.
Your link says several times that Fox News has a conservative bias, and I agree. I saw the link before and I agreed with it the first time too. What’s the problem?
Well, I mostly agree. Fox actually has a Republican bias, which is sort-of the same thing but not quite.
Okay, the report also says that CBS et al have a liberal bias, which they define as being to the left of Congress. They say, in fact, that these other news sources have a bigger liberal bias than the conservative bias at Fox News. I don’t doubt that either, but one the reason for it is that, as Stephen Colbert said, reality has a well-known liberal bias. Reality is also to the left of Congress.
Or rather, reality is less Republican than Congress, which is sort-of but not quite the same thing. I guess I only mostly agree with Stephen Colbert too.
Hell, not with Zunigas johnson. N’ that’s sayin’ something.
Not the type to accept correction graciously, are you Greg?
What exactly was your point of mentioning you don’t have a television then? Why would you state you hardly watch TV news while informing us all about the bias of TV news? Are just proud of your ignorance? Sucks when your close-minded psuedo-elitism bites you on the ass that way, huh?
Well, I am not going to argue with people that well versed in brilliant intellects like Stephen Colbert. Christ almighty where do these dipshits come from.
Ah. Colbert—that master of political theory. Such a deep thinker.
Waitaminnit. You said you don’t own a TV—you do know that Colbert’s a TV comic, don’t you?
<choke>
Yep, which explains the drive-by bullshit, eh perfesser? Because reason is best served by avoiding whatever doesn’t fit, er, reality.
Years of progressive failure and Delusion CooperBorg calls “reality”.
Greg K:
“reality has a well-known liberal bias.”
Well, sure. Provided we carefully select those portions of reality that confirm this notion and discard the rest. Not that I’m suggesting that this cute little point is sustainable only through circular logic.
I love the “well-known,” incidentally. My Soviet emigre friends tell me that whenever Pravda was about to tell a bald-faced lie, they’d introduce it with, “As is well known….”
Could someone please tell me if Greggie is for real or if he’s a parody.
I just can’t tell anymore.
This seems to be quite a habit with you. At least ‘round here.
OTOH, at least you admit it when you’re wrong. That’s kind of endearing.
It’s an article of
liberalleftist faith. Pretty odd for a math professor. One would expect a bias toward the provable which Greg strikingly lacks.Thank God someone hasfinally arrived to help clear the scales from our eyes–a man who knows the true nature of reality. Maybe all is not lost.
tw:smug
CooperBorg would be well advised to follow actus’s lead. The actard has learned the lesson well:
Around this crowd, never get pinned down by fact.
tw: Got reason?
That’s certainly true. We’ve seen him debate a point for days on end only to finally admit he hasn’t bothered to look at the facts.
*reality has a well-known liberal bias. Reality is also to the left of Congress. *
Maybe after some primo chronic. But otherwise, not so much.
Points for quoting a deep political thinker like Stephen Colbert. If you could possibly thrown in a John Stewart and Cindy Sheehan quote for more legitimacy, that would be greeeeaaaattt…
TW Brown = all true conservatives hate brown people.
::::CONTINUING COVERAGE::::
Protein Wisdom regular BoZ has said before that he gets Fox News via satellite, and that he has for years, yet he’s never actually tuned in to the channel, so he has nothing to say about it.
This is still true.
Reached for comment today, he stated that he hopes that his continued silence will serve as an example to others, and that if he can stop just one person, “some UC professor, say,” from “showin’ his ass” on the internet, his steadfast refusal to pontificate from televisual ignorance will have been worthwhile.
Anonymous sources within the internet characterize BoZ’s optimism as “retarded.”
I was finding it kind of repetitive, myself. Besides, what good does it do to admit to being wrong, when he don’t learn nothin’ from it?
Yeah, you can tell the man (greg) has a firm grip on reality when he 1) only cares about the bias of one media outlet; 2) doesn’t have the first clue about the true political affiliation of a notorious hater; 3) uses as his baseline for political thought the words of a comedian who spends all his time poorly parodying the other side.
I hope a thinker this big doesn’t have tenure. Frankly, I hope he has full time help so he won’t forget to feed and wash himself.
By the way, as a former resident of Sacramento, which is well to the … right of Davis (on the map), I can assure everyone here that Prof. Kuperberg may very well be his department’s token almost-within-sight-of-the-mainstream guy.
Unlike the UCLA study press release, which I had seen before, I didn’t know about the interesting Log Cabin Republican page that connects Fred Phelps to Al Gore. It has an interesting statement which, however, I don’t know how to analyze, so I’ll just repeat it without comment:
At this time the sources are themselves questionable, so the Vice President can end this mystery by denying any relationship with Phelps now.
In particular, I don’t know why they call their own sources questionable when the page also has photos to prove their case. On the other hand, it’s not always clear what a photo means. Here is a photo of Donald Rumsfeld with Fred Phelps, Jr., too. Oops, actually it’s not Fred Phelps. Mistaken identity.
In other news, I am well aware that Stephen Colbert is a comedian. Comedians can be right too, sometimes. I hope it does make me a pseudo-elitist. Better to be that than a real elitist.
Since people are still questioning why I divulged that I don’t own a TV, I’m sorry that I violated the don’t ask, don’t tell rule. But I’m not really sorry, because don’t ask, don’t tell is only for gays. I mentioned it because Jeff brought up the subject of TV in the post, and I wanted to explain that whatever I have to say about Fox, I don’t really like CNN better.
I used to watch a lot of TV. Several hours a day, in fact. It dawned on me in college that I had had enough TV for one lifetime.
In the interest of disclosure, we actually have a TV screen, in fact a 26” widescreen. It just doesn’t have reception or cable. We own it for the pseudo-elitist exercise of watching movies.
Dangnations, after those comments about “ribald” and Caligula, I thought we were in for a treat and the Banderas babe was going to do the Full Monty. Drats!
McGehee: “(mumble, mumble, mumble) and lead us not into temptation… (mumble, mumble, mumble).”
<reads Defense Guy’s comment>
<looks up at ceiling>
“Hey! What did I just say!?”
I am still questioning you because you won’t answer. In a discussion of TV bias the logical thing to do to support your assertion would be to claim to actually watch TV and know what you are talking about. Instead you state your opinion, then assert it is based on minimal actual experience and basically dismiss your own opinion. Why on earth would you do such a thing? The only thing I can come up with is you are basically an idiot. So far your responses have confirmed that, a snarky, unsucessfully evasive idiot.
Boz: Protein Wisdom regular BoZ has said before that he gets Fox News via satellite, and that he has for years, yet he’s never actually tuned in to the channel, so he has nothing to say about it.
I am tempted to say that you don’t know what you’re missing, but actually, you might well know. In any case I know what you’re missing, because I said, I do check what’s on TV sometimes when I have a hotel room. (After pulling down the shades and pulling out the Batman comics and Pepsi spiked with Jack Daniels.) I can also read transcripts of TV news shows, when there is any point. It saves an enormous amount of time.
Since Fox News is the Cheney channel, it is very relevant to American politics, so it is worth knowing at least in outline what it is about. It’s not a long story, really.
Since you don’t watch TV, of what value is anything you might have to say about it?
Got any surgical advice, Professor?
Nice comeback greg, show us a picture of Rumsfeld with Saddam. You are really showing those chops now boy. So, since you want to show your chops, why not put it into some historical perspective. I mean, Phelps must have had a different perspective back then right? Or shall we just assume that you are one who subsribes to the idea that all of history is one big dot and that linear progression of actions and policies is just a construct designed to distract from the ‘bigger picture’. So, give it up, when Phelps was in the warm embrace of the Democrats, what were his positions?
Hey, we hang together and aren’t easily divisible like you jaded, fickle-ass evens. Piss off.
OMG! Greg found the picture of an American envoy meeting with a Head of State 23 years ago! The jig is up!
He knows EVERYTHING! And with no TV!
Give it up, gents. We’ve been beaten.
By a bloody mathematics professor. Curses!
I mean, Phelps must have had a different perspective back then right?
I’m sure that his perspective back then was just as different as Saddam Hussein’s perspective.
Even though guilt by association is an honorable tradition, let’s try issues instead. Do you think that the Constitution should be amended to ban gay marriage? I’m with Fred Phelps on this one. The amendment should be defeated, because it would be a futile attempt to evade God’s wrath.
Phelps own site had/has pictures with Al Gore. I don’t know if they still reside there or not, I refuse to look at the site again.
It’s also a matter of public record that Fred has run in the Democratic primary for governor of the state of Kansas in 1990, 1994 and 1998.
Should I keep going? There’s a years long paper trail, all part of the public record.
Research, it’s what’s for dinner.
Holy crap!!! 26 inch WIDESCREEN? And you own it. I thought you could only rent those things for parties.
I have a good sized television, but I’m not going to flop it out on the table for someone to put the yardstick to it. Let’s just say that it gets the job done and leaves ‘em satisfied.
But the real deal is my Homer Simpson autographed Recliner Toilet. Never miss an important ****FOX NEWS ALERT**** – even if my egg sandwich goes off unexpectedly. I highly recommend.
Feh, movies are mostly crap, too. Except for the ones like Independence Day, where they blow shit up.
… cleaning the rooms.
No, not even a little bit.
Your turn. Do you think that a picture of Saddam and Rumsfeld shaking hands at a time when we backed Iraq in its war vs Iran has anything to do with our current situation?, if so why?
Wait a freaking minute. Who was the one trying to brand Phelps as a Republican?
YOU started the guily-by-association crap, bucko. Now that you’ve been hoist by your own petard, you’re whining that it’s not fair.
Ooooh! Tell us about God’s wrath, Greg!
*The hook baits itself, I swear!*
Do you think that a picture of Saddam and Rumsfeld shaking hands at a time when we backed Iraq in its war vs Iran has anything to do with our current situation?
Yes, absolutely, for two reasons. First, just because Saddam Hussein had “contacts” with a foreign organization, such as either Al Qaeda or the Pentagon, that doesn’t mean that he and that organization are allies. An even better example is that the United States has actually paid, equipped, and trained Islamic jihadists more than Saddam Hussein has (because they were fighting the Soviet Union at the time). But even that does not mean that these the parties are allies.
Second, the picture is a reminder is that a standoff between Iran and Iraq was in America’s strategic interest, frustrating though it was not to overthrow Saddam Hussein. By overthrowing him after all, they have aided the stronger enemy.
Greg, that photo is a little blurry. Who is Rumsfeld shaking hands with?
Thanks for the help
The amendment should be defeated because marriage isn’t a federal matter.
When I was all of how old?
Dude. We have flex-fuel engines!
Guys, you’re letting him change the subject. Don’t fall for it.
Wow, and I thought actus was a caricature of himself! This guy Kuperberg is da bomb! Shit, I couldn’t invent liberal cant that obtuse, antifactual and silly (and, if I did, I would be accused of having gone way past parody into slapstick). Not only does he offer opinions regarding things he admits he knows little/nothing about (but, then, that would include pretty much EVERYTHING, wouldn’t it???), but he then manages to dance through an entire thread, carefully avoiding any meaningful response or logical argument . . . or even any semblance of factual information to back up his “opinions,” all the while being pelted by viciously with fact after fact by us knuckle-dragging, Neanderthal Rethuglicans . . . and emerges with his unsupported, counterfactual worldview intact.
That takes some real “reality-based” mindset, doesn’t it?? And, to echo McGehee, I, too, was formerly a resident of Sackamenna, and Kuperberg is, indeed, probably rather closer to sanity than most of his colleagues.
Hey, prof, next time you want to educate us knuckle-draggers – cast your pearls before swine, so to speak – you might actually want to have some vague farkin’ clue of what the fuck you’re pontificating about . . . because it’s a cinch bet that at least some of us, if not the majority of us, will. And we enjoy laying a the smackdown on sanctimonious, “intellectual” elite wankers like yourself. I know mental masturbation is all the rage in academia, but out here where the rest of us live, you sorta need to achieve something a little more concrete than “intellectual” onanism. Oh, and yes, it is POSSIBLE for a TV comedian to be “right” and issues of political philosophy (although I wouldn’t bet my lunch money on it), but you will find your credibility, such as it is, will suffer somewhat if that is your idea of a persuasive/compelling source to support your “argumentation.”
Jeebus, what a maroon.
Kuperberg is the ur-actus.
I was going to try to get you to respond to my previous question as to what your motives were for mentioning that you don’t watch TV, but after this little pearl:
If you truly believe that our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq have strengthened Iran’s position, you are too stupid for me to continue to acknowledge. That is reality.
Do you think that a picture of Saddam and Rumsfeld shaking hands at a time when we backed Iraq in its war vs Iran has anything to do with our current situation?
Actually it is relevant for three reasons. It is also an example of the liberal bias of reality.
See, I didn’t just learn it from Colbert.
Its a lot like the UCLA study Jeff likes to cite.
Which is a fantastic study. Whenever a democrat cites to the ACLU, that helps to make “stoptheaclu.com” a left-leaning website. Fantastic stuff. Whenever a republican in congress cites to the extremist ACLU, that helps to make a mother jones article right leaning. Great stuff.
And I like how Jeff’s link reminds us that “it takes a congressional scholar” to come up with that.
Yes, only he had more than contacts with al quada and even more importantly he was an avowed enemy of the United States. Not that this matters to you I am sure. The other point of course is that at this point it’s all academic, since we did make war with him and we are now in the process of dealing with that reality. Perhaps you could catch up, rather than living in the past.
Conjecture, but even if it wasn’t, you are just stating in a round about way that we had it coming because we created this monster. Or perhaps you are stating that once we have made a mistake we must just live with it forever. Which, when you think about it, is a very odd position for a citizen living in a country which has abolished slavery, instituted woman’s suffrage, and fought long and hard to ensure equality of opportunity for all of its citizens. I’m curious how you manage to reconcile this.
I appreciate that you are trying. But to claim that Iran was the stronger of the two is just ridiculous. In either case, for some odd reason you seem to believe that once an action has been undertaken, that we must always and forever continue down that road, which as I have said is a very odd position for an American with even a small understanding of this countries history to take.
But don’t worry. There is the very real possibility that Iran and the US will fight a war sometime in the future, which I guess will make you happy.
If you truly believe that our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq have strengthened Iran’s position, you are too stupid for me to continue to acknowledge.
No, just Iraq. Afghanistan is totally different.
I have a source for it too, this time not a comedian. I learned it from General William Odom, among others. He was a Reagan appointee just like Rumsfeld, but he has been corrupted by the liberal bias of reality.
Actually, just claiming something is so doesn’t make it true. Although, it does seem to help all those children with imaginary friends. If you are comfortable being grouped in with children with active imaginations, then I have no problem treating you as such.
So, you would have gone after Iran first?
Conjecture, but even if it wasn’t, you are just stating in a round about way that we had it coming because we created this monster.
No, that’s not what I’m saying, in a roundabout way or otherwise. There is a saying that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. I don’t mean to say that it’s completely true, but the Reagan Administration understood the truth in it, so it prudently helped steer the Iran-Iraq war towards a standoff. But no, they didn’t create Saddam Hussein or his military. The Soviet Union did, which I think was the ultimate sand in the eyes for the Bush Administration: it’s not that he’s Muslim, it’s that he’s an old Cold War enemy.
To claim that Iran was the stronger of the two is just ridiculous.
You should look at the CIA factbook and at the basics of recent history. Iran pumps more oil than Iraq; it has three times as many people; it has more GDP per capita, never mind total GDP; it was winning the Iran-Iraq war until the US and Arab countries propped up Iraq; and it openly had all of the uranium work that Bush 43 merely accused Saddam Hussein of having. It’s just the truth that Iran is much stronger than Iraq. (I will resist the Colbert explanation for why you might think it’s ridiculous.)
Everyone ignore actard.
…but he has been corrupted by the liberal bias of reality.
Might that be a euphenism for George Soros crazy-money?
Cordially…
You bought Gun? Sorry.
Well, I bought Death By Degrees, so, even though my purchase was $10, it still outsucks yours.
So, you would have gone after Iran first?
If Iran is three times the size of Iraq, and if the occupation Iraq is already more than the US Army can handle without the draft, then it follows that we should find ways to deal with enemy countries other than invading them. Like containment, for example. It’s not that containment is any great source of joy for anyone; but sometimes it’s the best that we can do.
I eagerly await enlightenment about this “Afghanistan” of which the Professor writes. Do tell.
Oh, and his thesis on “more than the US Army can handle without the draft”. Those idiots at the Command and General Staff Officer College seem to have shorted me on that one!
Sure, if you ignore his repeated violations of the Gulf War ceasefire, his corruption of the UN through OFF, and his support for terrorists—including the 1991 WTC bombers (at the least after the fact). But none of that’s part of the “liberal reality”, is it?
And, frankly, if it were not for Iraq, we would be hearing—endlessly—about the quagmire in Afghanistan, the “atrocities” committed there, etc. Anyone who paid attention knows that the crap spewed from the “reality based community” about Iraq started with Afghanistan. It’s pure myth to claim the left (in general) supported the removal of the Taliban.
Is the Republican Party your enemy?
(I know I said I was leaving, but this dude just keeps lobbing them up there, dammit.^^)
Sorry, I know that someone might call me on this, so to be precise, Iran has 2.56 times as many people as Iraq according to the CIA factbook. Three times is an overstatement.
It’s also to the point that Iran has 6 times the GDP of Iraq (by purchasing power parity) or 3.9 times the GDP (by exchange rates).
Sure, he’s a college professor lecturing us on what is reality. That should be parody. Instead, I believe it is parroty, tink. He is just parroting what he’s heard in the faculty lounge. Which, by the way, does have a TV.
tw: actually he might really know but since he normally gets paid to teach and none of us has paid him, why should he bother? Hmmm?
OK greg. I understand that having your worldview questioned can be troublesome. So, I’ll just point out that you are now trying to backtrack your position that Iran was more powerful to Iran is NOW more powerful. Well, yeah, no shit. Wonder why that is? I admit that the idea that we took him out because he was on the wrong side in the cold war is a new one to me, so at least you have some freshness to your conspiracies.
Also, by any imaginable metric and completely independant of who said what when, Saddam was a monster worth getting rid of. So, it should make you smile at least a little that we managed to do so. The same is true of the mad mullahs running the show in Iran.
Lastly, I won’t make you wear Phelps around your neck because you share the same party with the man, because honestly the guy is just an asshole and what party he affiliates himeslf with really just doesn’t matter. You guys dont want him and we dont want him, so we can easily just agree that he is an island of asshole all to himself.
Flagwaver posited Greg as an “intellectual†onanist.
Since then every time Greg spurts out
I feel icky.
But back on the original topic—Greg, why did you first try to associate Phelps with Republicans, and only later whine about “guilt by association”?
And, frankly, if it were not for Iraq, we would be hearingâ€â€endlesslyâ€â€about the quagmire in Afghanistan, the “atrocities†committed there, etc.
It’s not my responsibility to answer for what you think you’d be hearing. You wouldn’t have heard it from me. All I will say is that the Afghanistan operation, although necessary and winnable, isn’t easy. When people think that they can do the impossible, they often blow the possible along with it in the end.
Is the Republican Party your enemy?
No, not especially. All I will say is that one-party control is bad for America.
Greg tried to saddle Republicans with Phelps, so he deserves the force-feeding of reality he got in response.
I’m guessing that in “liberal reality” Phelps is a Republican (it has a certain truthiness to it for some people). It’s just that “liberal reality” has no bearing on the real world.